passed by IV Addl.C.M.M., Bangalore in C1.C.No.8129/2001.
g-«%'?§A°5§fif'
_ 1 -
¥N THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 26?" DAY OF' JUNE 2009
BEFGRE
THE H()N'I;3LE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH ;a.AI)i] _ %JJ._V
CRIMINAL pmrrioa No.41 13(2o_¢s~- I ' %
BETWEEN: ' F. T'
s FOUL '
S/0. swammrm
NO.88'?, ABBMAH REDDY LAYOUT
BANASAWADI,
BANGALORE -- 560 043. . _ '.'.,1=I:?.{_*1'i':<:ar~:ER
{By Sri. MAHESH PUT'I'ARAJ 85 Assoc1ém3*§s,.e_mvS)" «. . 3
AND:
DoM1NICA.--5mQUE:1RA'*«:;;:,.
NANDA DWEEP APR RTMEN'?
C-3, v1vAs}aI ROAD *
REC}-IARDS*_'I'OWN .
BfiNGAI2ORE..-_-560 005. * ' .. RESPONDENT
(By SM1′._SHASiiiK; u£.. N,”Ai3\’7j
V”rHié;’ cf°R’LAP FILED Ufi-5.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE
FETETEQNER’~PRAY”£35_¥G TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 3.7.07 on THE
r§’_iL1«:,oF VIELADDL, }€3MM., BANGALORE BY ALLOWING APPLICATION 01?
RESPQNDVENWCOMPLAINANT AND FRAMING CHARGE FOR OFFENSES U,!S.
409 AND 420 m.__:_ AGAINST THE PETRJN C.C.NO.8129/01.
TE~II;3″.PE’I’ITiON COMING SN FOR ORDERS THIS BAY, THE COURT
‘ ” ~ .. V’1″~.’f..z.sA. 133 TH E..i¥DLLOWiNG:
ORIDER
Petitioner has called in question the order dated 3.7.209?
..,.,,
.2-
2. Complainant — respondent had flied a private complaint
for alteration of ofience punishable under Section into 406
IPC. Learned Magistrate after considexting the matter
that the complainant had filed a private
206 Cr.P.C. and the matter was __refe1’i’ed—-~::
investigation under Section 156(3}__ o£”‘Ci’.!5;eC’L 5
Police have submitted ‘B’ rep:J rt«,_
had filed a protest petition. the} compiainant
and Witnesses Wexe the learned
Mafistrate came to the fade charge has to
be framed for Secfion 409 and 420
iPC. Hoi1éev’e.z;fthe’: that, offence is pr:ma’
fczcie ro::A.Ase¢uon§ E20. me. but the learned Magistxate
has foundVV’t32£it’vthe ‘vofl1ji1ce”»LVpunishab1e is one under Section 409
and ._%l:n£)’t~ 406;’ ” V…Qens;3’defing the same. he has passed the
efder inieralia obsexving that, the charge has to be
409 and 420 we. I do not find there is
by the iearned Magistrate. No error is
even today in this case also.
” » faccoxuingxy, the petition fails and same is dismissed.
Sd/-3
Judge
MNM!»